Bureau Advisory Group Meeting 3 May
Outline of a Resource Mobilization Strategy Doc No: BurAG/2017/05/03/06d
Background
The outcomes of the informal meeting on sustainable funding for CFS, convened by the CFS Chair on
9 March 20171, concluded that there was wide recognition:



Formatted: English (United States)
that a business as usual approach to the future of CFS resourcing was not deemed
appropriate;
how inadequate funding jeopardises the whole CFS model; and
that sustainable funding for CFS is important2.
Several Members also suggested approaching more philanthropic foundations and private sector
organizations for funding, provided suitable safeguards against conflict of interests could be in place.
CFS 43 made specific recommendations as to funding3. In addition, while still not endorsed by CFS,
recommendations on this issue were made in the Evaluation of CFS.
The final report of the Independent Evaluation of CFS recommends that: “The Bureau should take the
following actions to secure sustainable funding for CFS:
i)
It should develop a resource mobilization strategy as a matter of urgency. The resource
mobilization strategy should underpinned by a clear, simple message about CFS that will
appeal to potential funding partners. The resource mobilization strategy should be for CFS
Plenary and workstreams, the HLPE and the CSM.
ii) The sources of funding should be diversified. Private foundations and the private sector
should be considered, provided there are no conflicts of interest. The donor base from public
sources should be expanded, with an appeal to those CFS Member States that have not
funded CFS since the reform.
iii) The RBAs should formalize their contribution through a Memorandum of Understanding and
could be approached for an increase in their annual contribution. It is not possible to predict
the size of the increase as this would depend on the number of workstreams in a given
MYPoW.
iv) There should be greater transparency in the budgeting process, showing how budget
allocation decisions have been arrived at. Equally important is transparency in the
1
This initiative followed the agreement of the Bureau and Advisory Group Members during their July 2016
meeting that there should be a discussion with CFS Members and Participants beyond the Bureau and Advisory
Group members, on ensuring sustainable funding to implement agreed MYPoW activities. It also followed the
Bur/AG meeting of 29 November 2016 which discussed “Ensuring sustainable funding to implement agreed
MYPoW priorities”.
2
CFS Sustainable Funding Meeting 9 March 2017, CFS Chair’s Summary
3
Document CFS 2016/43 FINAL REPORT, paragraph 31 e, f and g states: “The Committee:
e) Recommended that the MYPoW OEWG continues its work with a view to presenting a feasible and realistic
proposal on the CFS activities to be carried out in the biennium 2018- 2019 for endorsement by the CFS Plenary
in 2017, taking into account available resources and the need for a manageable workload; f) Encouraged all CFS
Members to contribute unearmarked extrabudgetary resources to the CFS budget and to ensure that reso urces
are available for translation and interpretation, noting the importance of these services for stakeholders’
participation; g) Further encouraged CFS Members to explore long-term solutions to address CFS budget
predictability based on consensus.”
Page 1 of 3
Outline of a Resource Mobilization Strategy
expenditure. There should be accounting of actual expenditure where this is currently not
the case, except for the HLPE and CSM.
v) Consideration should be given to having a position in the Secretariat dedicated to resource
mobilization, budget analysis and expenditure reporting. “
A Resource Mobilization Strategy
The above indications stress that a more systematic resource mobilization strategy is needed.
The objective of the resource mobilization strategy would be to secure the resources needed to
implement the CFS MYPoW, including the work of the HLPE, by the time the MYPoW is approved in
Plenary (October). While it would aim at supporting CSM’s fundraising activities, it would not have
funding for CSM’s budgetary needs as a direct objective. CSM, as a self-organized mechanism, would
continue to identify their own resource needs and lead their resource mobilization.
The strategy could assist CFS to:





Clarify needs and expected results, based on the MYPoW, which also sets the work of the
HLPE;
Communicate to resource partners the value added of CFS and all its components
(workstreams and plenary, HLPE reports and inclusiveness);
Assess the resource mobilization environment and the nature of contributions needed for
the work over the relevant period (e.g. governments, UN, philanthropic foundations and
private sector organizations, earmarked or not, in kind);
Set guiding principles (e.g. on the use of unearmarked resources and their distribution
between CFS activities and components, management of/safeguards against conflict of
interest)
Set a structured yearly or biennial calendar for fundraising, (eg periodic individual
consultations with potential resource partners in line with their funding cycles - indicating
responsible actors for each).
Target resource partners would include:






Governments;
regional/international organizations;
RBAs
Other UN agencies
Foundations
Corporate
Assuming the RBAs’ contribution will continue to fund the budget of the Plenary and workstreams
component at least at the current level ($4.05 million per biennium), noting the CFS evaluation
recommendation the RBAs should consider a small increase, the resource mobilization efforts would
be focused on the gap between the RBA contribution and the cost of implementing the full MYPoW,
HLPE activities, and outreach4 .
4 The CFS budget in past bienniums indicatively amounts to around USD 10 million, inclusive of USD 6 million
for Plenary and Workstreams, USD 2.4 million for the CFS High Level Panel of Experts (HLPE) and USD 1.6
million for the Civil Society Mechanism (CSM). Part of the budget is provided by the Rome-based Agencies
(RBAs) through a combination of staff and cash (USD 4.05 million per biennium); and the rest is provided by ad
hoc voluntary contributions, most of which are earmarked.
Page 2 of 3
Outline of a Resource Mobilization Strategy
Building the strategy will be done through consultations with CFS stakeholders. The strategy will
need to be underpinned by messaging about CFS that will appeal to potential funding partners.
Developing the strategy will represent an opportunity to further refine the broader CFS messaging as
well as that associated with specific fundraising objectives.
Clarifying roles for fundraising amongst CFS actors, noting that CFS Members are the foremost
targets for contributing resources, could also be addressed in the strategy. It could establish
coordination mechanisms amongst the distinct elements of CFS (Plenary, workstreams; HLPE; and
CSM, each of which are budgeted and managed separately).
The strategy would need to be closely linked to the MYPoW development process and the priorities
identified in it.
Next Steps
Implementation of the strategy may entail additional resource costs. Pending views and feedback on
expectations for resource mobilisation from the Bureau, after their consultation with the Advisory
Group, the Secretariat can further elaborate a draft strategy, in consultation with the RBAs’ relevant
offices.
Page 3 of 3
Formatted: English (United States)